Terror resurfaces

On the face of it the series of blasts and bomb attacks in Assam and Nagaland are a clear rejection of the Assam government’s offer of ...

On the face of it the series of blasts and bomb attacks in Assam and Nagaland are a clear rejection of the Assam government’s offer of talks and ceasefire. But they also indicate that some militant groups have come together to put coordinated and concerted pressure on the administration and law enforcement agencies in this region. The obvious aim of the militants would be to demonstrate their strength in any future negotiating position even while ordinary people are terrorised into submitting to their diktat. At the same time, these terrorist acts undoubtedly seek to provoke the government into harsh reprisals which

would only create more alienation and increase the popular support for militancy. The widespread perception of the home ministry remaining ambivalent at best and paralysed at worst for nearly three months after the Manorama Devi incident in Manipur had no doubt helped to encourage militant groups to stage this dramatic comeback.

The Assam chief minister appears to be way off the mark when he argues that India should seek the cooperation of Bangladesh in wiping out militant sanctuaries in its territory knowing that they have, unlike in Bhutan, continued to receive strong support from various quarters — even those linked to the government. The central question that the state and Central governments must ask is this: has there been any complacency on their part after the ULFA and other militant groups had been hounded out of their sanctuary in Bhutan? It was very clear that those reverses had weakened the ULFA and other groups, as well as undermined their credibility. So why have Indian intelligence and law enforcement agencies been unable to exploit the fallout of the Bhutan operations? Instead of anti-militancy operations weakening these terrorist organisations in the wake of the Bhutan operations, the militants have been allowed to re-establish their presence.

What we need — both in the long as well as immediate term — is a calm handling of the situation. The state governments as well as the Centre must come up with viable policy that goes beyond the usual “tinkering”: like the creation of “nodal” officers as a parallel system to what should be a normal practice among neighbouring states at the political and bureaucratic levels. The terrorist no doubt always holds the initiative since he can choose the time and place of its strike. But this only underlines the importance of a coherent and holistic policy to deal with these ruthless killers who stoop at nothing — even attacking children in an Independence Day ceremony — in order to demonstrate their strength and pernicious intent.